list_nodes

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that this is a GET operation, that results are keyed by node ID, and what fields the summary versus detailed response includes. It could mention default behavior or empty-result handling, but it gives solid transparency for a read-only listing tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The core purpose and endpoint are front-loaded, followed by a clear summary-vs-detailed distinction. Every sentence contributes useful information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple optional-boolean list tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It explains the return structure for both summary and detailed modes, and there are no additional parameters or complex behaviors that need elaboration.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the boolean 'detailed' parameter is already described in the schema. The description adds meaningful nuance by specifying exactly what the summary contains and what additional data the detailed mode returns, going beyond the schema's one-line description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb ('List'), the resource ('connected Tdarr nodes'), and the endpoint (GET /api/v2/get-nodes). It also distinguishes the tool from node-related siblings by focusing on listing nodes rather than updating, restarting, or fetching node logs.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description establishes a clear context: it is for listing connected Tdarr nodes and covers both summary and detailed views. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is unambiguous enough that an agent can infer when this tool is appropriate compared to other node-management tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.